One thing for sure – PAP is really desperate that they are bending and hitting so low below the belt!

This “Cooling off” day is an innovative and Uniquely Singapore way of committing towards the efforts to curb global warming.

But all in all, they are humans…we cannot blame them for been too human….you also make the same mistake….

however, the blame should be on all those who don’t admit to their own fault

Tripartism in singapore vs tripartism elsewhere for that matter, as mentioned by another reader.

but who writes the MSM news?
journalists?

In PM Lee’s language, it is the ‘spirit’ that matters. If the spirit of the proposed law is to aid rational choice, it should also allow for the reading of news from all perspectives, not just the mainstream media speaking with a PAP voice.

The problem lies in the fact that something as vague as ‘spirit’ can be anyhow interpreted by the MIW.

Funny, how politics are in Singapore. Anywhere else in the world you see governments doing things to win the trust of their people. Only in Singapore, the people must win the trust of the government. We must show the PAP government that it must continue to win our trust in them, not the other way around.

The control of the MSM, the frequent political meandering that include changing the constitution at its wimp and fancy, the blaming of its people when things do not go well (not productive, bad English, uncouth behavior) etc. etc. are just some of the more telling areas that clearly show how distrustful this government is of its people.

And now, to top it off, we have to proof ourselves worthy voters; with level-headedness and coolness before we are allowed to decide who we want as representatives of our interests.

If anyone still cannot fathom this outrageous and nonsensical proposition, then it is a sad day indeed for the citizens of Singapore. We have lost our power completely. In any democracy, the power of the people lies in their power to vote. We are now being told how we should vote and in the manner that one political party decides we should vote.

Lose this power and we will be a people lost – lost to our own stupidity.

though this cooling off thing is practised by a few other countries as well, we need to question is the rule applied exactly the same or just the name is same?

Well said. The same applies to tripartism too. The International Labour Organisation endorses tripartism, but it is the not the same variant as NTUC’s tripartism, but PAP and NTUC use it as an excuse to say the international community endorses the Singapore flavour of tripartism.

Don’t be silly. In a Westminster system, the party that wins is the legitimate power. If a coalition beats the current ruling party, the current ruling party has no legal basis for calling a re-election simply because it has lost power.

1) Politicians get down and dirty, they all do, opposition or ruling party, with whatever they can get away with. This macam gentlemen’s agreement is utterly pretentious. Who’s buying it?

2) How astute a political maneuver it is to imply the people are too stupid to vote without forcing them to calm down. (If the people are dumb enough to vote without thinking, they fully deserve what’s coming to them.)

3) Policing opposition sites? Way to go man PAP for building/demanding trust in the Information Age.

4) Governments should rule with a firm arm, not a death grip. The opposition doesn’t have to lift a finger to point out how oppressive PAP is. PAP does a grand old job themselves.

5) What kind of political analysts does the administration have? And what sort of salaries are they on? Haven’t they heard of the Streisand Effect? You try to suppress something on the Internet, it implodes spectacularly. Be more politically savvy lah, get paid so much…

6) A shrewder and more productive “cool off” policy would be to encourage all parties to engage the citizenry on their websites; are there any lingering questions that should be addressed before everyone heads out… Anyone tries anything farnee, says something stupid, lies, it’s on the very public record. It raises the quality of political discourse, accountability and engagement beyond sloganeering instead of flattening it. Everyone benefits; better policians, better voters.

7) Telling bloggers what they can or cannot do flies in the face of reality. “Head in the sand” stoopit. Predictably, bloggers are already out in force and socio-political blogs are gratefully taking the opportunity to claim credibility in spite of gagging orders.

8) I’d love to see how enforcement pans out. That can easily spawn a golden age of anti-PAP blogging based wholly on retaliation and conspiracy theories, and not on merit.

I don’t see the upside at all. What is PAP thinking? Do policy-makers get Internet (“have” and “understand”)? Maybe THEY need to cool off.

As long as no Defamation, why should they shutdown or stop offering discussions for all citizens including PAP supporters who are welcome to post?

For the sake of our beloved nation, we should allow all non-political sites to run and allow all non-political party members to post their views. As long as not defamatory which has to be proven also as singapore is supposedly based on rule of law.

So, in this aspect i agree with Fang.